38
Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

  • Upload
    bary

  • View
    20

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy. The rise of automobile led to the exhaustion of oil supplies in Pennsylvania and Ohio. By 1920 , a major “energy crisis” had developed - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental

Policy

Page 2: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

2

• The rise of automobile led to the exhaustion of oil supplies in Pennsylvania and Ohio. By 1920, a major “energy crisis” had developed– Conservationists warned of resource depletion -- economic slow-

down. Called for public policies to reduce energy use– But resource scarcity -- increased oil prices. Incentives to

discover/develop new oil fields– Major finds in Texas & California. Cheap oil supported economic

boom in 1940s-1960s• The market mechanism:

1. Led to the discovery of oil & oil-using technologies2. Found a solution to the scarcity crisis of 1920s

Page 3: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

3

• A second energy crisis occurred in 1970s– Although the U.S. was once the world’s leading oil exporter, production

peaked c. 1970 -- increased dependence on imported oil (especially from the Persian Gulf)

– In 1973, the Organization of Oil Exporting Nations (OPEC) embargoed the U.S. market. Arab member states felt that the U.S. was favoring Israel in the Arab-Israeli War

– Oil prices shot up explosively -- gas lines + economic chaos. Combination of inflation + high unemployment

– Oil prices peaked again following the 1978-1979 Iran-Iraq War

Page 4: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

4

Tarr Farm, Oil Creek, Pa – 1861

Today

Page 5: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

5

Source: Energy Information Agency, Annual Energy Review (www.eia.doe.gov/aer)

World Oil Prices, 1968-2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Year

1996 $/bbl

Page 6: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

6

• Presidents Ford and Carter called for ambitious energy policies. Carter said that the energy crisis was the “moral equivalent of war.” This approach gained only limited support in Congress– Laws were passed to:

1. Increase automobile fuel economy2. Deregulate domestic oil production3. Implement the Strategic Petroleum Reserve - America’s Oil Stockpile

– Meanwhile, high oil prices led to:1. Widespread energy conservation2. The development of alternative oil supplies (e.g., Norway, Great

Britain, Mexico, Indonesia, and Nigeria – see reading)• By 1990s, oil prices had receded to pre-shock levels, mainly because of the

influence of market forces

Page 7: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

7

Understanding (Environmental) Public Policy

How the structures of politics and government drive policy (environmental and otherwise) outcomes

Public policy – a course of government action or inaction in response to a social problem. Includes:

1. Goals articulated by political leaders

2. Formal statutes and regulations

3. Practices of administrative agencies + courts charged with implementing or overseeing programs

There are many factors that aid or hinder the development of effective environmental policies in democratic societies

• Success or failure is intimately related to the system of checks and balances that adjudicates the interplay between stakeholder interests

Page 8: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

8

BEGIN with POLITICS…Toward Environmental Politics

Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary – “Politics” is:

1. “The art or science of government”

2. Governing for the environment = environmental politics or…

• Environmental politics = resolving conflicts over natural resources + environmental quality; &

• Balancing needs/interests of different stakeholders, and competing visions of what a “sustainable” society might look like.

Page 9: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

9

Origins of Contemporary Environmental Policy

A “utilitarian” philosophy of resource management closely tied to Teddy Roosevelt, came from: Gifford Pinchot. (One of Roosevelt’s closest advisors. Architect of the US’s earliest conservation initiatives in forestry and water resources.)

WHY: 1. Politics soiled by influence pedaling outcomes that favor special interests

2. Public policy should promote public interest

3. Efficiency in resource use of prime importance

Pinchot’s inspiration: “Philosopher kings” of Plato’s Republic. The people (lacking wisdom) must be ruled by intellectual elite with the skills/knowledge needed to govern

Approach in tension with democratic self-governance.

In the US, there was a firm belief that conservation efforts directed by a scientific elite would also = equitable distribution of benefits of resource exploitation

But we need to go back even further…

Page 10: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

10

… Medieval period• State authority sanctioned by Church. • Power defined (and limited) by moral rules of religious traditions

Religious skepticism resulted in new conceptions of government. Grounded in notions of individual autonomy

Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan (1651):

In absence of political institutions,THE STATE, people would live in “state of nature” where life was “nasty, brutish, and short”

Resource scarcity necessitates state intervention. A rational person would freely relinquish autonomy to attain social harmony under the rule of a benevolent sovereign

“Thomas Hobbes…argu[ed] that without the Leviathan state there could be no property as we (all of you) in (y)our savagery would have no regard for entitlements of any kind.”

(Bell, and Lowe, “Regulated Freedom: The Market and the State, Agriculture and the Environment,” Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 16, Issue 3, pp. 285-294 (2000) )

Page 11: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

11

Checks and Balance in the U.S. Government

1. The Legislative Branch (Congress)

• Textbook role is to define the “public interest” = policies + institutions that promote the general welfare

• Focuses on the social values behind public policy + defining “rules of the game”

• Late 1960s + early 1970s: Congress passed major laws = basic structure of environmental policy (National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act)

• Congress has “Hobbesian” powers – setting limits on individual autonomy to protect the environment. But accountable to popular will through biennial elections

Page 12: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

12

2. The Executive Branch (White House + administrative agencies)

• Textbook role is to “implement the law.” Reality is more complex

• Statutes (acts of Congress) provide only a blueprint of regulatory policy. Define policy goals + process through which agencies work out details

o Clean Air Act – air quality standards for particulates, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, ozone, and lead must be set at level required to “protect public health”

o The Environmental Protection Agency is charged with “promulgating” regulations regarding emissions standards + implementation strategy

Page 13: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

13

• Why does Congress delegate rule-making power to the executive branch?

o Congress represents popular will (people’s preferences) but lacks knowledge of nitty-gritty details. Trusts that technical experts (with suitable oversight) will faithfully fulfill Congressional mandate

3. The Judicial Branch (the courts)

• Textbook role is to “interpret” the law. Reality is again more complex

• The U.S. Constitution defines basic civil rights – free speech, freedom of religion, security of one’s property, etc.

o Courts defend these rights against abuse by a “Hobbesian” state, providing a check against “tyranny of the majority”

o Long-standing controversy: Can Congress impose regulatory costs on private landowners in order to save endangered species?

Page 14: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

14

4. Civil Society (citizens + nongovernmental organizations)

• Role is to elect the President + members of Congress and hold them accountable

• Citizen groups can serve as “policy entrepreneurs” or create “advocacy coalitions”= develop new ideas + build political support

• The anti-tax policies of the Reagan Presidency were preceded by Proposition 13 – a California ballot initiative that rolled back property taxes

o Proposition 13 was sponsored and championed by private citizens outside the normal political process

o It illustrates how – when the people lead – elected officials sometimes follow

Page 15: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

15

The Policy Process Model

Textbook (ideal type) description of the policy process:

• Agenda setting -- policy formation -- policy legitimation – budgeting – implementation – evaluation -- continuation/adjustment/termination

• If citizens, Congress, the executive branch, and the courts all did their jobs then outcome should be “good” policy

In reality, the government machine is not always well-tuned. Politics involves conflict between individuals + groups with incompatible interests

• The traditional paradigm – environmental policy is reacts to each new environmental problem as it occurs by focusing on the result (not the cause)

• Self-seeking behavior by political actors leads to “government failure.” Occurs when policies lead to misuse of scarce resources – e.g. wasted tax dollars + needless regulations

Page 16: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

16

The Tellico Dam Case Study

• The Tellico Dam was built by the Tennessee Valley Authority in the 1970s

• Goal = industrial development + recreation opportunities on the Little Tennessee River

• The project was opposed by community groups favoring conservation of agricultural land, wild river amenities, and sacred Cherokee sites

• The project failed to pass a cost-benefit test. The river was more valuable in its natural state than as a large-scale water project

• But TVA administrators, business groups, and local Congressional representatives all favored the project

o Enhanced prestige + budgets for administrators. Construction contracts for businesses. “Pork barrel” project for elected officials

Page 17: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

17

• The project was nearly blocked by the Endangered Species Act (ESA)

o A rare fish – the “snail darter” – was discovered at the site when construction was 90% complete

o The ESA requires the strict protection of endangered species

• Congress (led by Senator Howard Baker of Tennessee) passed a special exemption to the ESA as a “rider” to a Department of Interior appropriations bill

• The Tellico Dam was completed in November 1979

• In subsequent years, a surviving population of the snail darter was discovered in a different part of the watershed

Page 18: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

TVA v. Hill - 1978

V.

Page 19: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

19

The “Iron Triangle”

Federal Agency U.S. Bureau of ReclamationArmy Corps of EngineersTVA

Private BusinessConstructions firmsCement industry

Congressional Representative

House and Senate members

Page 20: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

20

Two Challenges for Environmental Policy

What forces perpetuate the Iron Triangle in a democratic society?

1. The costs of environmental regulations often fall narrowly on particular industries, while the benefits are broadly diffused across society

• It’s hard for citizens to mobilize around problems that affect them in relatively modest ways. 75% of Americans are “environmentalists.” Yet the environment ranks low relative to other priorities

• Businesses, though, have powerful incentives to fight costly regulations (what Carter calls the “power of producers”)

• End result: Action is most likely on high-profile issues with modest control costs. It’s more difficult to resolve issues involving complex science + steep regulatory costs

Page 21: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

21

The Role of the Market Economy:The “Invisible Hand”

• A “market” is a setting where goods and services are bought and sold– Institutional context: People hold claims (“property rights”) to goods

that they may voluntarily exchange. These claims are backed up by legal and/or moral authority

– Institutions = rules of the game that order the relationships between members of society. Examples = laws, regulations, moral codes, and social norms

• Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations (1776) described the fundamental worldview that guides modern economics– Smith’s argument: The market mechanism, through which people

engage in self-seeking behavior, is an effective method for promoting collective welfare

– Key assumption: People are rational – they systematically seek to maximize their well-being or “utility”

Page 22: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

22

Critiques of the Market Mechanism

• Despite the power of Smith’s reasoning, modern economics provides several arguments against relying on markets in decisions that relate to the environment1. The “invisible hand” assumes that markets exist for every

good. Yet no markets exist for environmental quality = need for environmental policies• This lies at heart of “commons dilemmas” which we discussed in

Unit 1 and will again2. Economic rationality = strong assumption. Markets work

well when people understand their options and know their preferences• From Marsh to the present, environmentalists have worried that

the lack of scientific understanding leads to the abuse of natural resources

Page 23: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

23

3.Markets do not ensure fairness. They do not guarantee that income or economic benefits are equitably shared• Market proponents state that 18th century miners are

better off working the mine than facing unemployment• Social critics like Dickens and Marx, however, deplored

the harsh working conditions associated with early capitalism

• In the 20th century, governments responded with worker safety regulations and public education to provide workers with better economic opportunities

• The bottom line – while improved working conditions might be seen as socially desirable, the market mechanism would not result in this outcome

Page 24: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

24

 Other Market Shortcomings…Externalities

• An externality exists when one person’s actions affect someone else without consent or compensation

Negative externality: A polluter’s actions impose costs on society that are not

reflected in market prices. No incentive to control pollution = “too much”

pollution

Positive externality: My efforts to maintain my home make my neighborhood

a nicer place. My neighbors benefit but do not compensate me for my time

• Externalities exist because (1) Markets are incomplete; (2) Property rights aren’t well-defined. (3) Problems of enforcement

How to “internalize” environmental externalities?

1.  Regulate pollution emissions or polluting technologies

2. Tax pollution to account for external costs

3.  Create and Enforce well-specified property rights

Page 25: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

25

Theoretical role of property rights in a market economy: Efficiency + equity

-- Well structured property rights essential to efficient markets.

-- Fairness requires equitable distribution of rights between social groups: Rights to education, basic material needs, a healthy environment.

The Role of Property Rights, One example…

Año Nuevo State Park– Marine reserve on central California coast. Elephant seal calving area in January through March. 1-hour drive

from San Francisco (6-million person metropolis)

Park employs quota system + entrance fees to keep visitor volumes within reasonable limits (creates a market for the experience of “nature”). Restrictions necessary both to protect seals and aesthetic enjoyment of park

What if there were no restrictions on park visits? Site might be overrun with visitors from all parts of Bay Area

Page 26: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

26

Market Rhetoric “invisibility”…

Page 27: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

27

…and competition in “free markets”…

Bell & Lowe wonder: What are the implications of

market rhetoric & absolutism?

Page 28: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

28

Hardin’s “Tragedy of the Commons”

• Garrett Hardin’s 1968 essay addresses main points in this lecture from physical scientist’s perspective

• Hardin = geneticist at U.C. Santa Barbara concerned about population growth + environmental degradation. Specific arguments on this point remain controversial

Environmental problems:

1.   Are caused by rational choices of individuals

2.   Demand moral/behavioral, not technical, solutions

Does Hardin’s argument favor state or market interventions in environmental politics?

Page 29: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

29

Consider a grazing land (a “commons”) that is open for use by all members of society. • No rules restrict its use

  • Historically, “commons” = shared public lands managed by complex rules + social arrangements. Pre-industrial societies often managed such lands efficiently and sustainably

  • So…what Hardin terms a “commons” is a misnomer; today’s social scientists term what he describes as a state of “open access”

Each person owns a herd of cattle, choosing between two herd sizes – “low” and “high.” Individuals earn incomes that depend on the state of the resource

If all herdsman choose “low,” then each earns a good income. Resource is managed sustainably = shared benefits for community

Vs.

If all herdsman choose “high,” then the rangeland is damaged = poor incomes. Too many cattle = ecological degradation

Page 30: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

30

Hardin’s insight: Although small herd sizes are best for society as a whole, individuals face strong incentives to overexploit the resource.

If I choose “high” while others choose “low,” then I will earn an excellent (rather than just good) income

If I choose “low” while others choose “high,” then I will achieve a very poor (rather than just poor) outcome

Hardin’s argument:

 “Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit – in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons. Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all”

Reasoning applies to both resource depletion (fisheries) and environmental degradation (pollution). Constitutes powerful argument against “invisible hand” rhetoric

Hardin’s Solution…?

Page 31: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

31

Page 32: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

International Environmental Conventions, Treaties, & Protocols

• Basel Convention Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, Basel, 1989;

• United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification; • Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty; • Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora

and Fauna, (CITES); • Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution; • Convention on Biological Diversity; • Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals; • Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer;• Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas; • International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture; • International Tropical Timber Agreement, (ITTA), Geneva, 1994.

Page 33: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

International Environmental Law - Foundation

• See Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration (1972):States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to the their environmental principles, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of the other states or areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

Page 34: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

34

Lessons from Ozone Depletion – Montreal Protocol

• Ozone depletion became an a major issue in the mid-1980s

– By 1987, a global agreement (the Montreal Protocol) had been signed to begin phasing out ozone-depleting substances

– So ozone depletion is a case study of successful international cooperation, utilizing the precautionary principle through a doctrine of common but differentiated responsibilities.

– Both positive and negative lessons emerge for other environmental issues

Page 35: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

35

• Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were introduced in the postwar period as refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and industrial solvents

– They were perceived as “safe” chemicals that resolved the toxicity and corrossivity problems raised by previous technologies

• 1974: A study by F.S. Rowland and M.J. Molina concluded that CFCs might deplete the ozone layer

– CFCs migrate to the upper atmosphere (the “stratosphere”). Intense sunlight releases chlorine free radicals that attack ozone

– Ozone depletion increased ultraviolet radiation at the Earth’s surface skin cancers + ecological impacts. Rowland and Molina predicted that this process would be gradual

– Initial policy response: Congress banned the use of CFCs as aerosol propellants (1978). Similar measures were adopted in Canada and Scandinavia

Page 36: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

36

• October 1984: British scientists detected a 40% ozone depletion in the Antarctic atmosphere (the “ozone hole”)

– This effect was far greater than scientists believed possible

– A review of old satellite data found that severe ozone depletion had been occurring over Antarctica for a number of years

– The computer used to process these data had been programmed to ignore such large effects as observational error

– Subsequent research found that ozone depletion is magnified by special ice crystals found in Antarctic clouds. Less severe ozone depletion is observed in the Arctic and Northern Europe

Page 37: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

37

• In 1987, the international community adopted the Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer (the “Montreal Protocol”)

– This agreement was updated and strengthened in subsequent meetings held in London (1990), Copenhagen (1992), Montreal (1997) and Beijing (1999)

– Industrial countries agreed to phase out all CFC production by 2000. This target date was later rolled back to 1995 for the U.S. and Europe

– Developing countries agreed to phase-out CFCs by 2010. A “Multilateral Fund” was created to help developing countries make the transition

Page 38: Markets, Economics, and Property in U.S. & International Environmental Policy

38

• Why did the Montreal Protocol succeed?

1. The “Ozone Hole” was a major focusing event - e.g., Issue Attention Cycle

2. Substitutes for CFCs were readily developed. The costs of the CFC phase-out were therefore modest

3. The world’s largest producer of CFCs (DuPont) took the lead in developing and marketing substitutes